|
On May 12 2013 03:41 Zarahtra wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2013 03:21 Rabiator wrote:On May 12 2013 03:16 Chocobo wrote:On May 11 2013 19:49 Godwrath wrote:On May 11 2013 18:06 Chocobo wrote:
Yep. Kinda like how mines are cost efficient vs everything zerg has in the first 15-20 minutes of the game. Erhm, no. Other than broodlords, what is cost efficient against mines for zerg? 1. Spore and Spine Crawlers for the early game ... (They are even good against Hellbat drops since neither of these dies easily to the "vs light" damage and the Medivac dies faster ... which prevents its reuse. Spore Crawlers are great against Phoenix and Oracle too ....) 2. Sending in Overlords to soak up the shots right before your charge ... Just watch a few TvZ games with early harrassment and IMO it is always the "diehard oldschoolers" who try to defend against Hellbat harrassment with Zerglings who are losing the match while the ones who build static defenses seem to be fine. That might be a misperception on my part, but I would suggest you check for yourself. The whole point of HotS seems to be "more harrassment" ... Hellbat, Oracle, Mutalisk regen, Medivac speed, Widow Mine, ... so preparing for that is a requirement and not optional now IMO. Also 2x +3 attack upgrade blings kill a mine(that is less than +3 armor upgrade) which I'd argue isn't that cost inefficient for a zerg(100/50 vs 75/25). It is really obnoxious when a zerg sends 2x blings ontop of a widow mine and blows it up, but terrans quite often in a hurry burry 2x next to each other, so atleast those times it is cost effective. I see it as a great way for a zerg to keep the amount of widow mines on the field in control, rather than letting it spiral.
So, just to be clear: I don't think there is any imbalance in the matchup overall, but I do believe that ling/bling/muta (even if you manage to upgrade 3-3+cracklings, 3-0 AND even with small infestor support) can't fight against marine/medivac/mine (or hellbat/tank/marauder variations) and you have to go ultras/broodlords to win after the early 3base Terran phase.
That being said, it's not good to trade banes vs mines like that. The equation goes basically like this:
1) marines > lings, mutas, roaches, hydras, queens, swarm hosts
2) marines < banelings, ultralisks, huge infestor count, huge broodlord count
Basically, all you want to do as a Terran in those engagements is kill as many banelings efficiently or in equal trades as you can before they touch marines. The rest is just a mob up.
On May 12 2013 04:51 plogamer wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2013 04:48 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 12 2013 03:20 Whitewing wrote:
Be very careful about changing TvZ even if you conclude it is imbalanced. Right now at the highest level, it's the most engaging and exciting matchup to watch. The entire matchup frequently turns into a super long push from terran trying to break zerg while zerg tries to throw the push back one time, with both players micro'ing their faces off to try to be efficient. It's incredibly interesting to watch how they try to out control one another with constant battles and counter attacks. The wrong buff to zerg or nerf to terran could ruin that kind of push and send us back to both players maxxing out before doing anything.
TBH, I think the main problem is that zergs let terrans be too greedy and don't punish it. I kind of agree if they opened with Hellions/Reapers etc. however, you can't always punish it, and it is a lot harder if they opened with 1-2 Siege Tanks(which some of them are doing, mind you) or Mines. It also depends on the map a lot. Or Idra's super greedy opener versus Polt could also be the correct response when scouting 3 cc opener. /edit When it comes to greed, I don't think any race can top the Zerg race.
I disagree. When zerg is greedy, zerg gets more mining earlier but no tech at all. When Terran is greedy, they still get their full tech tree much earlier and still have the same amount of CCs, but terran only needs to defend a single entrance (compared to two for outdoor basing zerg). Both races have their ups and downs when playing greedy.
I agree with Whitewing on that matter. People should roach rush the fuck out of Terrans. Soulkey, Roro, Symbol and Kangho all have been roach rushing, baneling busting and nydusing their way into Ro8 against Terrans this GSL. Shine made it far similarily (those games against Fantasy...).
Life, BBong, DRG, Hyun tried to play macrogames and got destroyed.
The macro-metagame right now is very simple. Terrans build 3CCs, double ebays, a few hellions/reapers and go into mass reactored barracks+stim/shields and reactored widow mines/medivacs. Before 9-10mins, a Terran won't have any defences down apart from the hellions and a handful of widow mines/marines. On the flip side, a zerg invests into multiple queens, speed, speedlings, sometimes roaches/defenses relatively early without there even being any actual thread apart from those few hellions/reapers and just falls behind.
But if you just blindly allin with roaches, a Terran often won't even have the production to react to anything you do because that build can't really produce anything that does not come from a reactored factory, before 9-10mins.
And if a Terran even goes more greedy (like instead of defensive mines, even drops mines/hellbats early with this or gets his upgrades even faster or even more barracks early on, or just 4hellions), it's just a freewin, even if you just put on some semiallinish roach aggression with a third behind it, or a really late roach allin that hits at 10+mins.
|
On May 12 2013 08:11 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2013 03:41 Zarahtra wrote:On May 12 2013 03:21 Rabiator wrote:On May 12 2013 03:16 Chocobo wrote:On May 11 2013 19:49 Godwrath wrote:On May 11 2013 18:06 Chocobo wrote:
Yep. Kinda like how mines are cost efficient vs everything zerg has in the first 15-20 minutes of the game. Erhm, no. Other than broodlords, what is cost efficient against mines for zerg? 1. Spore and Spine Crawlers for the early game ... (They are even good against Hellbat drops since neither of these dies easily to the "vs light" damage and the Medivac dies faster ... which prevents its reuse. Spore Crawlers are great against Phoenix and Oracle too ....) 2. Sending in Overlords to soak up the shots right before your charge ... Just watch a few TvZ games with early harrassment and IMO it is always the "diehard oldschoolers" who try to defend against Hellbat harrassment with Zerglings who are losing the match while the ones who build static defenses seem to be fine. That might be a misperception on my part, but I would suggest you check for yourself. The whole point of HotS seems to be "more harrassment" ... Hellbat, Oracle, Mutalisk regen, Medivac speed, Widow Mine, ... so preparing for that is a requirement and not optional now IMO. Also 2x +3 attack upgrade blings kill a mine(that is less than +3 armor upgrade) which I'd argue isn't that cost inefficient for a zerg(100/50 vs 75/25). It is really obnoxious when a zerg sends 2x blings ontop of a widow mine and blows it up, but terrans quite often in a hurry burry 2x next to each other, so atleast those times it is cost effective. I see it as a great way for a zerg to keep the amount of widow mines on the field in control, rather than letting it spiral. So, just to be clear: I don't think there is any imbalance in the matchup overall, but I do believe that ling/bling/muta (even if you manage to upgrade 3-3+cracklings, 3-0 AND even with small infestor support) can't fight against marine/medivac/mine (or hellbat/tank/marauder variations) and you have to go ultras/broodlords to win after the early 3base Terran phase. That being said, it's not good to trade banes vs mines like that. The equation goes basically like this: 1) marines > lings, mutas, roaches, hydras, queens, swarm hosts 2) marines < banelings, ultralisks, huge infestor count, huge broodlord count Basically, all you want to do as a Terran in those engagements is kill as many banelings efficiently or in equal trades as you can before they touch marines. The rest is just a mob up. Show nested quote +On May 12 2013 04:51 plogamer wrote:On May 12 2013 04:48 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 12 2013 03:20 Whitewing wrote:
Be very careful about changing TvZ even if you conclude it is imbalanced. Right now at the highest level, it's the most engaging and exciting matchup to watch. The entire matchup frequently turns into a super long push from terran trying to break zerg while zerg tries to throw the push back one time, with both players micro'ing their faces off to try to be efficient. It's incredibly interesting to watch how they try to out control one another with constant battles and counter attacks. The wrong buff to zerg or nerf to terran could ruin that kind of push and send us back to both players maxxing out before doing anything.
TBH, I think the main problem is that zergs let terrans be too greedy and don't punish it. I kind of agree if they opened with Hellions/Reapers etc. however, you can't always punish it, and it is a lot harder if they opened with 1-2 Siege Tanks(which some of them are doing, mind you) or Mines. It also depends on the map a lot. Or Idra's super greedy opener versus Polt could also be the correct response when scouting 3 cc opener. /edit When it comes to greed, I don't think any race can top the Zerg race. I disagree. When zerg is greedy, zerg gets more mining earlier but no tech at all. When Terran is greedy, they still get their full tech tree much earlier and still have the same amount of CCs, but terran only needs to defend a single entrance (compared to two for outdoor basing zerg). Both races have their ups and downs when playing greedy. I agree with Whitewing on that matter. People should roach rush the fuck out of Terrans. Soulkey, Roro, Symbol and Kangho all have been roach rushing, baneling busting and nydusing their way into Ro8 against Terrans this GSL. Shine made it far similarily (those games against Fantasy...). Life, BBong, DRG, Hyun tried to play macrogames and got destroyed. The macro-metagame right now is very simple. Terrans build 3CCs, double ebays, a few hellions/reapers and go into mass reactored barracks+stim/shields and reactored widow mines/medivacs. Before 9-10mins, a Terran won't have any defences down apart from the hellions and a handful of widow mines/marines. On the flip side, a zerg invests into multiple queens, speed, speedlings, sometimes roaches/defenses relatively early without there even being any actual thread apart from those few hellions/reapers and just falls behind. But if you just blindly allin with roaches, a Terran often won't even have the production to react to anything you do because that build can't really produce anything that does not come from a reactored factory, before 9-10mins. And if a Terran even goes more greedy (like instead of defensive mines, even drops mines/hellbats early with this or gets his upgrades even faster or even more barracks early on, or just 4hellions), it's just a freewin, even if you just put on some semiallinish roach aggression with a third behind it, or a really late roach allin that hits at 10+mins.
The only thing I want to add to this is the fact that, while having access to the tech, Terran can't utilize it in quite the explosive nature that Zerg (and even Protoss) can, nor is it as central of a role in winning. The only upgrade/tech that plays a huge, instant role is stim, and maybe combat shields and a tank. Having a starport or being able to produce hellbats isn't going to change the game when the first unit rolls out, unlike finishing a spire or making that first colossus (with range).
|
I love how all the people defending WM's and hellbats and afterburners JUST happen to be Terran 99% of the time.. you know there's something screwy with units when mirror match ups become a joke...
|
On May 12 2013 08:53 kamicom wrote:
I love how all the people defending WM's and hellbats and afterburners JUST happen to be Terran 99% of the time.. you know there's something screwy with units when mirror match ups become a joke...
tbh as a terrani think blizz should remove healing from hellbats and mayb change boost to increase the dmg taken while boostin, i dont think there is an issue with wm, just need time to get used to it, same as splitting vs banelings, took ppl like months to figure out that u can actually split vs banes
|
On May 12 2013 08:11 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2013 03:41 Zarahtra wrote:On May 12 2013 03:21 Rabiator wrote:On May 12 2013 03:16 Chocobo wrote:On May 11 2013 19:49 Godwrath wrote:On May 11 2013 18:06 Chocobo wrote:
Yep. Kinda like how mines are cost efficient vs everything zerg has in the first 15-20 minutes of the game. Erhm, no. Other than broodlords, what is cost efficient against mines for zerg? 1. Spore and Spine Crawlers for the early game ... (They are even good against Hellbat drops since neither of these dies easily to the "vs light" damage and the Medivac dies faster ... which prevents its reuse. Spore Crawlers are great against Phoenix and Oracle too ....) 2. Sending in Overlords to soak up the shots right before your charge ... Just watch a few TvZ games with early harrassment and IMO it is always the "diehard oldschoolers" who try to defend against Hellbat harrassment with Zerglings who are losing the match while the ones who build static defenses seem to be fine. That might be a misperception on my part, but I would suggest you check for yourself. The whole point of HotS seems to be "more harrassment" ... Hellbat, Oracle, Mutalisk regen, Medivac speed, Widow Mine, ... so preparing for that is a requirement and not optional now IMO. Also 2x +3 attack upgrade blings kill a mine(that is less than +3 armor upgrade) which I'd argue isn't that cost inefficient for a zerg(100/50 vs 75/25). It is really obnoxious when a zerg sends 2x blings ontop of a widow mine and blows it up, but terrans quite often in a hurry burry 2x next to each other, so atleast those times it is cost effective. I see it as a great way for a zerg to keep the amount of widow mines on the field in control, rather than letting it spiral. So, just to be clear: I don't think there is any imbalance in the matchup overall, but I do believe that ling/bling/muta (even if you manage to upgrade 3-3+cracklings, 3-0 AND even with small infestor support) can't fight against marine/medivac/mine (or hellbat/tank/marauder variations) and you have to go ultras/broodlords to win after the early 3base Terran phase. That being said, it's not good to trade banes vs mines like that. The equation goes basically like this: 1) marines > lings, mutas, roaches, hydras, queens, swarm hosts 2) marines < banelings, ultralisks, huge infestor count, huge broodlord count Basically, all you want to do as a Terran in those engagements is kill as many banelings efficiently or in equal trades as you can before they touch marines. The rest is just a mob up.
The point I was making, and perhaps I wasn't quite clear enough is that there is a limited production of mines going on, from 2 or so reactor'd factories. The production of blings can be much greater than that, so if you can keep those mines down, eventually you will be forcing the terran to retreat or have to have really good splits since his AoE is gone or heavily diminished, at which time you can have more blings for the actual fight.
My point focused also probably too much about +3 attack, I was more meaning at that time they'd be just about cost effective to do. 3 blings for 2 WMs comes almost equal and if you know you dmg'd the WM you are likely able to take it out with blings.
As a terran, I can atleast say i find it really frustrating when they are trading the blings like that, since in TvZ I feel a terran needs to be way more cost effective than just slightly efficient. I feel I either need to get a money VM shot before the VM dies or get more than 1 shot with it.
|
every race has reactions to be equally greedy, sometimes in different ways
99% of players just have no idea what theyre doing
|
Every "upcoming balance patch" thread turns into a balance argument thread. Don't see why we need these. Blizzard isn't going to make changes to their plans based on VoidRayRomeo's back-and-forth with FearTheReaperMan taking place on some median page in the thread.
you should also be aware that unless you're like high masters you don't have enough perspective to be making any broad claims. bigj's post was decent, though.
|
After ages of frustration against zerg in LingsofLiberty, it certainly gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling to see all this QQ in here.
Doesn't stop zerg from mopping up the tournaments and doing extremely well in Code S though 
|
On May 12 2013 09:39 AxionSteel wrote:After ages of frustration against zerg in LingsofLiberty, it certainly gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling to see all this QQ in here. Doesn't stop zerg from mopping up the tournaments and doing extremely well in Code S though
Okay, jesus.
This season's code S had a fuckton of zergs carrying over from WoL. Everyone knows this. Even still, the distribution going into the ro16 was virtually equal for terran and zerg, despite the disparity in the ro32.
Furthermore, all these tournaments thus far have had variables that can't detect worthwhile balance concerns for shit--whether they're koreans wiping foreign tournaments with just 1-3 decent korean terrans in them, or it's Life winning MLG.
as BigJ pointed out, it's either Zerg doing these ridiculous roach/bane all-ins or Terrans having an easier time in a macro game. If both players play standard and no silly mistakes are made, we see T with a pretty sizable macro explosion in the mid-game which, compounded with mines, makes it hard on the zerg. It's just how it is. Don't need to quote extraneous tournament or ladder statistics to see it.
|
United States7483 Posts
On May 12 2013 09:28 Let it Raine wrote:
every race has reactions to be equally greedy, sometimes in different ways
99% of players just have no idea what theyre doing
Not equally greedy, greedy in completely different ways and in different magnitudes. Protoss lacks the ability to be nearly as greedy economically as either zerg or terran, and cannot really out-tech either of them if they choose to speed tech. What they can do is grow in all directions simultaneously with an emphasis on upgrades of various kinds, but it's still not quite as much as what terran can manage (terran can do the same with tech and economy and units). This is okay though, because Protoss gains more advantage from tech than terran does, so even though they can both tech rapidly, that benefits toss more. Zerg cannot really be greedy on tech and economy at the same time: the gas requirement for tech slows down drone growth specifically because of the exponential design of zerg economy.
The races are asymmetrical, by definition that means greed is not going to be equal for all races, but that's okay, so long as each player reacts appropriately. Harass units are in the game specifically because they can do damage inordinate to their cost, which compensates for a lack of economic greed in favor of tech or army powering. However, at the moment, economic greed vastly trumps tech greed from protoss, mostly because protoss lacks mineral based harassment that is cost efficient. The terran hellion is an excellently designed unit (hellbats aside) for harass because it allows the terran to sink gas into tech. The protoss has no such unit: the best he can do is heavy zealot warp-ins which is inefficient and lacks real punch: just try to chase down workers with zealots. Over the course of a long game it can be worthwhile, but only when toss gets into a position where he can afford to just throw away minerals due to the ineffectiveness of zealots in small numbers. That's why you see harassing protoss players warp in a large group of zealots at a time, rather than the 4 hellions that terrans drop. Protoss units designed for harass like phoenix or oracles cost gas, which means protoss can't use them and tech rapidly at the same time. It's telling that the zerg response to oracles or phoenix is to get a spore at each base, a couple extra queens, and drone and expand even faster.
If greed is a balance concern, the first place to look for fixing it is harassment. Greed isn't the issue in TvZ because terran harass is efficient, and because both races possess the means to punish greed with a potent direct assault. Greed isn't really an issue in PvT either because Protoss tech is more potent than Terran tech, which compensates for the lack of economic greed options. Greed is a problem in PvZ because Zerg economy does well against Protoss tech by flooding units, Zerg tech is potent (ultralisks, broodlords and vipers are all very powerful, nevermind swarm hosts or mutalisks), and Protoss has no option for keeping up with zerg economy. The oracle is a failure as a harass unit because it's too easy to defend and too expensive: you really can't afford to make more than 1 and just 1 dies reasonably easily. In PvT oracles are potent very early on if there is no widow mine or turret in the mineral line, but they quickly become entirely obsolete as a harass unit. I'm not saying oracles are underpowered or overpowered: just that their design is poor. (Actually, I think Revelation might be the best spell in the game).
This is mostly the reason most PvZ games revolve around zerg taking a super fast third base, greeding up, and protoss either hitting a 2 base all-in timing or playing ridiculously defensive until maxxed out, and then trying to kill zerg in one push. Protoss can't harass efficiently enough to make harass worthwhile. Phoenix play is the only real form of harass we see, and it's not really specifically for harass only, it's there for scouting and to deny mutalisks, the harass is a bonus (and not a particularly efficient one given the cost of the phoenix and the stargate).
Even if the matchup is balanced to exactly a 50-50 winrate, the way greed works here makes the matchup stale and dull.
|
|
|
On May 12 2013 08:50 aksfjh wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2013 08:11 Big J wrote:On May 12 2013 03:41 Zarahtra wrote:On May 12 2013 03:21 Rabiator wrote:On May 12 2013 03:16 Chocobo wrote:On May 11 2013 19:49 Godwrath wrote:On May 11 2013 18:06 Chocobo wrote:
Yep. Kinda like how mines are cost efficient vs everything zerg has in the first 15-20 minutes of the game. Erhm, no. Other than broodlords, what is cost efficient against mines for zerg? 1. Spore and Spine Crawlers for the early game ... (They are even good against Hellbat drops since neither of these dies easily to the "vs light" damage and the Medivac dies faster ... which prevents its reuse. Spore Crawlers are great against Phoenix and Oracle too ....) 2. Sending in Overlords to soak up the shots right before your charge ... Just watch a few TvZ games with early harrassment and IMO it is always the "diehard oldschoolers" who try to defend against Hellbat harrassment with Zerglings who are losing the match while the ones who build static defenses seem to be fine. That might be a misperception on my part, but I would suggest you check for yourself. The whole point of HotS seems to be "more harrassment" ... Hellbat, Oracle, Mutalisk regen, Medivac speed, Widow Mine, ... so preparing for that is a requirement and not optional now IMO. Also 2x +3 attack upgrade blings kill a mine(that is less than +3 armor upgrade) which I'd argue isn't that cost inefficient for a zerg(100/50 vs 75/25). It is really obnoxious when a zerg sends 2x blings ontop of a widow mine and blows it up, but terrans quite often in a hurry burry 2x next to each other, so atleast those times it is cost effective. I see it as a great way for a zerg to keep the amount of widow mines on the field in control, rather than letting it spiral. So, just to be clear: I don't think there is any imbalance in the matchup overall, but I do believe that ling/bling/muta (even if you manage to upgrade 3-3+cracklings, 3-0 AND even with small infestor support) can't fight against marine/medivac/mine (or hellbat/tank/marauder variations) and you have to go ultras/broodlords to win after the early 3base Terran phase. That being said, it's not good to trade banes vs mines like that. The equation goes basically like this: 1) marines > lings, mutas, roaches, hydras, queens, swarm hosts 2) marines < banelings, ultralisks, huge infestor count, huge broodlord count Basically, all you want to do as a Terran in those engagements is kill as many banelings efficiently or in equal trades as you can before they touch marines. The rest is just a mob up. On May 12 2013 04:51 plogamer wrote:On May 12 2013 04:48 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 12 2013 03:20 Whitewing wrote:
Be very careful about changing TvZ even if you conclude it is imbalanced. Right now at the highest level, it's the most engaging and exciting matchup to watch. The entire matchup frequently turns into a super long push from terran trying to break zerg while zerg tries to throw the push back one time, with both players micro'ing their faces off to try to be efficient. It's incredibly interesting to watch how they try to out control one another with constant battles and counter attacks. The wrong buff to zerg or nerf to terran could ruin that kind of push and send us back to both players maxxing out before doing anything.
TBH, I think the main problem is that zergs let terrans be too greedy and don't punish it. I kind of agree if they opened with Hellions/Reapers etc. however, you can't always punish it, and it is a lot harder if they opened with 1-2 Siege Tanks(which some of them are doing, mind you) or Mines. It also depends on the map a lot. Or Idra's super greedy opener versus Polt could also be the correct response when scouting 3 cc opener. /edit When it comes to greed, I don't think any race can top the Zerg race. I disagree. When zerg is greedy, zerg gets more mining earlier but no tech at all. When Terran is greedy, they still get their full tech tree much earlier and still have the same amount of CCs, but terran only needs to defend a single entrance (compared to two for outdoor basing zerg). Both races have their ups and downs when playing greedy. I agree with Whitewing on that matter. People should roach rush the fuck out of Terrans. Soulkey, Roro, Symbol and Kangho all have been roach rushing, baneling busting and nydusing their way into Ro8 against Terrans this GSL. Shine made it far similarily (those games against Fantasy...). Life, BBong, DRG, Hyun tried to play macrogames and got destroyed. The macro-metagame right now is very simple. Terrans build 3CCs, double ebays, a few hellions/reapers and go into mass reactored barracks+stim/shields and reactored widow mines/medivacs. Before 9-10mins, a Terran won't have any defences down apart from the hellions and a handful of widow mines/marines. On the flip side, a zerg invests into multiple queens, speed, speedlings, sometimes roaches/defenses relatively early without there even being any actual thread apart from those few hellions/reapers and just falls behind. But if you just blindly allin with roaches, a Terran often won't even have the production to react to anything you do because that build can't really produce anything that does not come from a reactored factory, before 9-10mins. And if a Terran even goes more greedy (like instead of defensive mines, even drops mines/hellbats early with this or gets his upgrades even faster or even more barracks early on, or just 4hellions), it's just a freewin, even if you just put on some semiallinish roach aggression with a third behind it, or a really late roach allin that hits at 10+mins. The only thing I want to add to this is the fact that, while having access to the tech, Terran can't utilize it in quite the explosive nature that Zerg (and even Protoss) can, nor is it as central of a role in winning. The only upgrade/tech that plays a huge, instant role is stim, and maybe combat shields and a tank. Having a starport or being able to produce hellbats isn't going to change the game when the first unit rolls out, unlike finishing a spire or making that first colossus (with range).
Errr, a lot of Terran's greatest would-be tech you get for free (ie. Siege Mode/Medivac Boost) and these are just as "explosive" as anything Zerg and Protoss have, especially the Medivac Boost.
I agree with pretty much everything Big J said except I do feel that TvZ is just slightly in favor of Terran (as most stats show) and just needs a tiny, tiny adjustment.
A lot of Terrans in this thread are saying contradictory things like "Zerg shouldn't be able to be so greedy" and "Zerg units should be cost-inefficient". It can't be both otherwise it would be terribly imbalanced. If Zerg is going to be the cost-inefficient race they need to be able to out-expand the other races. The question is: is it currently too difficult for Zerg to be as greedy as they need to be to make up for cost-inefficient midgames? I would say it's probably just a tad too difficult and is due a tiny, tiny adjustment as I already said.
|
Haa this is nice! So they say a lot of information shows that everything is nicely balanced 
|
Chocobo I think you're wrong in the argument. I don't think Blizzard should balance-patch according to anything but pro play. If good but not great players have problem with something, well, that's a shame for them, but it's the players who require a patch, not the game. It's already really hard to get something decent when players aren't making too many mistakes...
Even though I think you're wrong, I find some of the counter-arguments you have received to be somewhere in between shocking and hilarious, so, there's that side too.
|
On May 12 2013 12:50 vRadiatioNv wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2013 08:50 aksfjh wrote:On May 12 2013 08:11 Big J wrote:On May 12 2013 03:41 Zarahtra wrote:On May 12 2013 03:21 Rabiator wrote:On May 12 2013 03:16 Chocobo wrote:On May 11 2013 19:49 Godwrath wrote:On May 11 2013 18:06 Chocobo wrote:
Yep. Kinda like how mines are cost efficient vs everything zerg has in the first 15-20 minutes of the game. Erhm, no. Other than broodlords, what is cost efficient against mines for zerg? 1. Spore and Spine Crawlers for the early game ... (They are even good against Hellbat drops since neither of these dies easily to the "vs light" damage and the Medivac dies faster ... which prevents its reuse. Spore Crawlers are great against Phoenix and Oracle too ....) 2. Sending in Overlords to soak up the shots right before your charge ... Just watch a few TvZ games with early harrassment and IMO it is always the "diehard oldschoolers" who try to defend against Hellbat harrassment with Zerglings who are losing the match while the ones who build static defenses seem to be fine. That might be a misperception on my part, but I would suggest you check for yourself. The whole point of HotS seems to be "more harrassment" ... Hellbat, Oracle, Mutalisk regen, Medivac speed, Widow Mine, ... so preparing for that is a requirement and not optional now IMO. Also 2x +3 attack upgrade blings kill a mine(that is less than +3 armor upgrade) which I'd argue isn't that cost inefficient for a zerg(100/50 vs 75/25). It is really obnoxious when a zerg sends 2x blings ontop of a widow mine and blows it up, but terrans quite often in a hurry burry 2x next to each other, so atleast those times it is cost effective. I see it as a great way for a zerg to keep the amount of widow mines on the field in control, rather than letting it spiral. So, just to be clear: I don't think there is any imbalance in the matchup overall, but I do believe that ling/bling/muta (even if you manage to upgrade 3-3+cracklings, 3-0 AND even with small infestor support) can't fight against marine/medivac/mine (or hellbat/tank/marauder variations) and you have to go ultras/broodlords to win after the early 3base Terran phase. That being said, it's not good to trade banes vs mines like that. The equation goes basically like this: 1) marines > lings, mutas, roaches, hydras, queens, swarm hosts 2) marines < banelings, ultralisks, huge infestor count, huge broodlord count Basically, all you want to do as a Terran in those engagements is kill as many banelings efficiently or in equal trades as you can before they touch marines. The rest is just a mob up. On May 12 2013 04:51 plogamer wrote:On May 12 2013 04:48 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 12 2013 03:20 Whitewing wrote:
Be very careful about changing TvZ even if you conclude it is imbalanced. Right now at the highest level, it's the most engaging and exciting matchup to watch. The entire matchup frequently turns into a super long push from terran trying to break zerg while zerg tries to throw the push back one time, with both players micro'ing their faces off to try to be efficient. It's incredibly interesting to watch how they try to out control one another with constant battles and counter attacks. The wrong buff to zerg or nerf to terran could ruin that kind of push and send us back to both players maxxing out before doing anything.
TBH, I think the main problem is that zergs let terrans be too greedy and don't punish it. I kind of agree if they opened with Hellions/Reapers etc. however, you can't always punish it, and it is a lot harder if they opened with 1-2 Siege Tanks(which some of them are doing, mind you) or Mines. It also depends on the map a lot. Or Idra's super greedy opener versus Polt could also be the correct response when scouting 3 cc opener. /edit When it comes to greed, I don't think any race can top the Zerg race. I disagree. When zerg is greedy, zerg gets more mining earlier but no tech at all. When Terran is greedy, they still get their full tech tree much earlier and still have the same amount of CCs, but terran only needs to defend a single entrance (compared to two for outdoor basing zerg). Both races have their ups and downs when playing greedy. I agree with Whitewing on that matter. People should roach rush the fuck out of Terrans. Soulkey, Roro, Symbol and Kangho all have been roach rushing, baneling busting and nydusing their way into Ro8 against Terrans this GSL. Shine made it far similarily (those games against Fantasy...). Life, BBong, DRG, Hyun tried to play macrogames and got destroyed. The macro-metagame right now is very simple. Terrans build 3CCs, double ebays, a few hellions/reapers and go into mass reactored barracks+stim/shields and reactored widow mines/medivacs. Before 9-10mins, a Terran won't have any defences down apart from the hellions and a handful of widow mines/marines. On the flip side, a zerg invests into multiple queens, speed, speedlings, sometimes roaches/defenses relatively early without there even being any actual thread apart from those few hellions/reapers and just falls behind. But if you just blindly allin with roaches, a Terran often won't even have the production to react to anything you do because that build can't really produce anything that does not come from a reactored factory, before 9-10mins. And if a Terran even goes more greedy (like instead of defensive mines, even drops mines/hellbats early with this or gets his upgrades even faster or even more barracks early on, or just 4hellions), it's just a freewin, even if you just put on some semiallinish roach aggression with a third behind it, or a really late roach allin that hits at 10+mins. The only thing I want to add to this is the fact that, while having access to the tech, Terran can't utilize it in quite the explosive nature that Zerg (and even Protoss) can, nor is it as central of a role in winning. The only upgrade/tech that plays a huge, instant role is stim, and maybe combat shields and a tank. Having a starport or being able to produce hellbats isn't going to change the game when the first unit rolls out, unlike finishing a spire or making that first colossus (with range). Errr, a lot of Terran's greatest would-be tech you get for free (ie. Siege Mode/Medivac Boost) and these are just as "explosive" as anything Zerg and Protoss have, especially the Medivac Boost. I agree with pretty much everything Big J said except I do feel that TvZ is just slightly in favor of Terran (as most stats show) and just needs a tiny, tiny adjustment. A lot of Terrans in this thread are saying contradictory things like "Zerg shouldn't be able to be so greedy" and "Zerg units should be cost-inefficient". It can't be both otherwise it would be terribly imbalanced. If Zerg is going to be the cost-inefficient race they need to be able to out-expand the other races. The question is: is it currently too difficult for Zerg to be as greedy as they need to be to make up for cost-inefficient midgames? I would say it's probably just a tad too difficult and is due a tiny, tiny adjustment as I already said.
I mentioned tanks. I'm not saying things like medivacs don't change the game when they're out, but nobody hinges on that first one or two medivacs to hold a push or overrun a player. That's the general point, that there's just not much "just in time" tech for Terran. Tech is very fluid and only sways the tide of battle, instead of swinging it drastically one way or another.
|
On May 12 2013 09:22 Killmouse wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2013 08:53 kamicom wrote:
I love how all the people defending WM's and hellbats and afterburners JUST happen to be Terran 99% of the time.. you know there's something screwy with units when mirror match ups become a joke... tbh as a terrani think blizz should remove healing from hellbats and mayb change boost to increase the dmg taken while boostin, i dont think there is an issue with wm, just need time to get used to it, same as splitting vs banelings, took ppl like months to figure out that u can actually split vs banes
1. Remove healing from Hellbats is a great idea ... just as giving it to them was stupid from the get go ...
2. Letting a Medivac take more damage while boosting will NOT prevent any drops, because you are usually not attacked then (too few people build static AA in sufficient numbers AND at the edge of the base). That will only make them less likely to escape and that is kinda the opposite of what was intended by introducing the boost in the first place.
The game and especially - since the start of HotS - its harrassment mechanics have become far too effective. Sure this gives us nice games to watch on a pro level, but what about the non-pros who play for fun? They are screwed and get unsatisfactory games where they either win or lose after a few minutes and without any engagements of armies. I call that stupid + Show Spoiler ++ Show Spoiler +, but then there are too many people defending the "new advanced stuff" as being "improvements" over BW. They completely forget that technology would easily allow for super smart unit AI through customizable targeting preferences and unit formation (melee in the front and ranged at the back and Roaches in front of Hydras ...). These things are NOT in the game for a reason and for the same reason the "advancements" could equally not be in the game either if they are bad for the gameplay
|
I really think they should make the oracle damage based on the current energy level. A full energy oracle would do more, and a low energy oracle less. This would make oracles a good, but not game-ending early harassment option as well as enhance late game utility by tweaking the amount of damage it could do. The unit is just so boring in its current state.
|
On May 12 2013 13:53 aksfjh wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2013 12:50 vRadiatioNv wrote:On May 12 2013 08:50 aksfjh wrote:On May 12 2013 08:11 Big J wrote:On May 12 2013 03:41 Zarahtra wrote:On May 12 2013 03:21 Rabiator wrote:On May 12 2013 03:16 Chocobo wrote:On May 11 2013 19:49 Godwrath wrote:On May 11 2013 18:06 Chocobo wrote:
Yep. Kinda like how mines are cost efficient vs everything zerg has in the first 15-20 minutes of the game. Erhm, no. Other than broodlords, what is cost efficient against mines for zerg? 1. Spore and Spine Crawlers for the early game ... (They are even good against Hellbat drops since neither of these dies easily to the "vs light" damage and the Medivac dies faster ... which prevents its reuse. Spore Crawlers are great against Phoenix and Oracle too ....) 2. Sending in Overlords to soak up the shots right before your charge ... Just watch a few TvZ games with early harrassment and IMO it is always the "diehard oldschoolers" who try to defend against Hellbat harrassment with Zerglings who are losing the match while the ones who build static defenses seem to be fine. That might be a misperception on my part, but I would suggest you check for yourself. The whole point of HotS seems to be "more harrassment" ... Hellbat, Oracle, Mutalisk regen, Medivac speed, Widow Mine, ... so preparing for that is a requirement and not optional now IMO. Also 2x +3 attack upgrade blings kill a mine(that is less than +3 armor upgrade) which I'd argue isn't that cost inefficient for a zerg(100/50 vs 75/25). It is really obnoxious when a zerg sends 2x blings ontop of a widow mine and blows it up, but terrans quite often in a hurry burry 2x next to each other, so atleast those times it is cost effective. I see it as a great way for a zerg to keep the amount of widow mines on the field in control, rather than letting it spiral. So, just to be clear: I don't think there is any imbalance in the matchup overall, but I do believe that ling/bling/muta (even if you manage to upgrade 3-3+cracklings, 3-0 AND even with small infestor support) can't fight against marine/medivac/mine (or hellbat/tank/marauder variations) and you have to go ultras/broodlords to win after the early 3base Terran phase. That being said, it's not good to trade banes vs mines like that. The equation goes basically like this: 1) marines > lings, mutas, roaches, hydras, queens, swarm hosts 2) marines < banelings, ultralisks, huge infestor count, huge broodlord count Basically, all you want to do as a Terran in those engagements is kill as many banelings efficiently or in equal trades as you can before they touch marines. The rest is just a mob up. On May 12 2013 04:51 plogamer wrote:On May 12 2013 04:48 Ramiz1989 wrote:On May 12 2013 03:20 Whitewing wrote:
Be very careful about changing TvZ even if you conclude it is imbalanced. Right now at the highest level, it's the most engaging and exciting matchup to watch. The entire matchup frequently turns into a super long push from terran trying to break zerg while zerg tries to throw the push back one time, with both players micro'ing their faces off to try to be efficient. It's incredibly interesting to watch how they try to out control one another with constant battles and counter attacks. The wrong buff to zerg or nerf to terran could ruin that kind of push and send us back to both players maxxing out before doing anything.
TBH, I think the main problem is that zergs let terrans be too greedy and don't punish it. I kind of agree if they opened with Hellions/Reapers etc. however, you can't always punish it, and it is a lot harder if they opened with 1-2 Siege Tanks(which some of them are doing, mind you) or Mines. It also depends on the map a lot. Or Idra's super greedy opener versus Polt could also be the correct response when scouting 3 cc opener. /edit When it comes to greed, I don't think any race can top the Zerg race. I disagree. When zerg is greedy, zerg gets more mining earlier but no tech at all. When Terran is greedy, they still get their full tech tree much earlier and still have the same amount of CCs, but terran only needs to defend a single entrance (compared to two for outdoor basing zerg). Both races have their ups and downs when playing greedy. I agree with Whitewing on that matter. People should roach rush the fuck out of Terrans. Soulkey, Roro, Symbol and Kangho all have been roach rushing, baneling busting and nydusing their way into Ro8 against Terrans this GSL. Shine made it far similarily (those games against Fantasy...). Life, BBong, DRG, Hyun tried to play macrogames and got destroyed. The macro-metagame right now is very simple. Terrans build 3CCs, double ebays, a few hellions/reapers and go into mass reactored barracks+stim/shields and reactored widow mines/medivacs. Before 9-10mins, a Terran won't have any defences down apart from the hellions and a handful of widow mines/marines. On the flip side, a zerg invests into multiple queens, speed, speedlings, sometimes roaches/defenses relatively early without there even being any actual thread apart from those few hellions/reapers and just falls behind. But if you just blindly allin with roaches, a Terran often won't even have the production to react to anything you do because that build can't really produce anything that does not come from a reactored factory, before 9-10mins. And if a Terran even goes more greedy (like instead of defensive mines, even drops mines/hellbats early with this or gets his upgrades even faster or even more barracks early on, or just 4hellions), it's just a freewin, even if you just put on some semiallinish roach aggression with a third behind it, or a really late roach allin that hits at 10+mins. The only thing I want to add to this is the fact that, while having access to the tech, Terran can't utilize it in quite the explosive nature that Zerg (and even Protoss) can, nor is it as central of a role in winning. The only upgrade/tech that plays a huge, instant role is stim, and maybe combat shields and a tank. Having a starport or being able to produce hellbats isn't going to change the game when the first unit rolls out, unlike finishing a spire or making that first colossus (with range). Errr, a lot of Terran's greatest would-be tech you get for free (ie. Siege Mode/Medivac Boost) and these are just as "explosive" as anything Zerg and Protoss have, especially the Medivac Boost. I agree with pretty much everything Big J said except I do feel that TvZ is just slightly in favor of Terran (as most stats show) and just needs a tiny, tiny adjustment. A lot of Terrans in this thread are saying contradictory things like "Zerg shouldn't be able to be so greedy" and "Zerg units should be cost-inefficient". It can't be both otherwise it would be terribly imbalanced. If Zerg is going to be the cost-inefficient race they need to be able to out-expand the other races. The question is: is it currently too difficult for Zerg to be as greedy as they need to be to make up for cost-inefficient midgames? I would say it's probably just a tad too difficult and is due a tiny, tiny adjustment as I already said. I mentioned tanks. I'm not saying things like medivacs don't change the game when they're out, but nobody hinges on that first one or two medivacs to hold a push or overrun a player. That's the general point, that there's just not much "just in time" tech for Terran. Tech is very fluid and only sways the tide of battle, instead of swinging it drastically one way or another.
Hellbat drops are very powerful. Heck a standard 1-1 with medivacs timing is powerful as well. Marine Tank timing pushes are also very strong. I just don't see what you're getting at.
|
On May 12 2013 13:57 TGCid wrote:
I really think they should make the oracle damage based on the current energy level. A full energy oracle would do more, and a low energy oracle less. This would make oracles a good, but not game-ending early harassment option as well as enhance late game utility by tweaking the amount of damage it could do. The unit is just so boring in its current state.
Not a good idea IMO, because if you make the difference between max and min damage too small it wont change a thing, but if you make it too big you will make either harrassment at the lower end useless OR make it overpowered at the top end.
People simply need to learn to build static defenses when playing a Protoss or Terran to either kill or threaten away any Phoenix (static defenses cant be lifted), Oracles (static defenses are not light) and Medivacs (AA static defenses even give detection against Widow Mines). Once it doesnt make any sense anymore to do such early harrassment because people are defending properly these tactics wont be used as much anymore.
Since attacks supported by a Mothership Core are very popular atm I would think that static AA is great against that as well, especially since they all have range 7 and can "protect" a relatively large area from that unit to prevent it from giving vision up a level.
|
On May 12 2013 08:53 kamicom wrote:
I love how all the people defending WM's and hellbats and afterburners JUST happen to be Terran 99% of the time.. you know there's something screwy with units when mirror match ups become a joke...
Terran mirror is light years ahead of other mirrors in terms of entertainment
Based on your logic btw mutalisk should be nerfed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
